Jasim Zubair Bin v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 2/2021[2026] HKCFI 54

Court

High Court CFI

Date22 Jan 2026

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCAL 2/2021

[2026] HKCFI 54

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No 2 of 2021

BETWEEN
	Jasim Zubair Bin	Applicant
	and
	Torture Claims Appeal Board/	Putative
	Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office	Respondent
	and
	Director of Immigration	Putative
		Interested Party

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord 53 r 3)

Following;

	consideration of documents only; or
	consideration of the documents and oral submissions by the Applicant in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge (Non-Refoulement Claims) Vincent Lung:

1. Form 86 be amended, naming the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office as the Putative Respondent.

2. The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

Introduction

1.By a Form 86 filed on 4 January 2021 (the “Form 86”), the Applicant applied for leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “TCAB”) dated 13 November 2020, which affirmed the decision of the Director of Immigration (the “DOI”) dated 28 August 2019.

2.I amend the Form 86 on my own motion to name the TCAB as the putative respondent.

3.The Applicant requested for a hearing of this application which he attended. When asked if he had anything to add he confirmed that he had not.

4.After the hearing, by a letter received by the Court on 14 November 2025, the Applicant informed that he would wish to withdraw the application (in his words, “close [his] case”). This is consistent with the Applicant’s letter to the DOI of the same date.

5.I accede to the withdrawal. As explained in Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 at [19(1)], there was nothing outstanding in the action. The application is therefore dismissed.

Dated the 22^nd day of January 2026

(Gladys Lee)
for Registrar, High Court

Where leave to apply has been granted, Applicants and their legal advisers are reminded of their obligation to reconsider the merits of their application in the light of the Respondent’s evidence

Notes for the Applicant: If leave has been granted, the Applicant or the Applicant’s solicitors must:
a) serve on the respondent and such interested parties as may be directed by the Court the order granting leave and any directions given within 14 days after the leave was granted (Order 53, rule 4A); b) issue the originating summons within 14 days after the grant of leave and serve it in accordance with Order 53, rule 5; and c) supply to every other party copies of every affidavit which the Applicant proposes to use at the hearing, including the affidavit in support of the application for leave (Order 53, rule 6(5)).		Sent to the Applicant on 22/01/2026 Jasim Zubair Bin Applicant’s ref. no: Nil.		Sent to the Putative Respondent / the Putative Respondent’s solicitors / such Putative Interested Parties as may be directed by the Court / the Putative Interested Parties’ solicitors on 22/01/2026 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 16284/19/9/40/B2086 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 491/19 (Formerly as RBCZ 10358/19) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1